21KillzCowboys Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I can't say that I disagree. Finally, a journalist who doesn't bash the Skins for their decision on LA. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/07/labor/2.html • Somebody out there could always make the mistake of helping LaVar Arrington recoup that $4.4 million he forfeited to buy his way out of his Washington contract. But if you've been paying attention the past three years or so -- to the injuries, to the coaches who have grown frustrated with his act and to his penchant for self-aggrandizing -- I don't know why you would invest big money in a player whose reputation far exceeds his recent production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins1972 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 But I thought our FO doesnt know what they are doing? Hell is freezing over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Oh.....so NOW Don Banks knows what he's talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlhjr34 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Wow someone from SI that actually wrote an intelligent piece? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Oh.....so NOW Don Banks knows what he's talking about? I never thought I'd see the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Don't worry he's already fine tuning his next article that after another successful 4-12 season (as he predicted last year), the Redskins will be fortunate to get three wins this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Wow someone from SI that actually wrote an intelligent piece? Right, because he agrees with you? I thought we gave up giving any weight to what these people say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talk show host Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I'm just wondering where he got this from in the article: • I haven't seen this reported anywhere, but it turns out this whole CBA extension process has been slowed by the Redskins gamely holding out for a reduced salary cap. Not for the players. For the coaches. With Gibbs making such big bucks, and three of his assistants pulling down seven figures a year -- Gregg Williams, Al Saunders and Greg Blache -- Daniel Snyder has got to be saying, ''Stop me, before I over-spend again.'' that doesnt even make sense to me. anyone know what the heck he's talking about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Wow someone from SI that actually wrote an intelligent piece? i think he's actually playing the number on this one. i would imagine the average redskins fan is upset lavar was released. so the article was more of a cheap shot at that demographic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptaylor75 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 That guy's an idiot. He contradicts himself in the alst two segments. First he says the skins are wanting a reduced cap. Then he says Snyder wants to be rid of the cap so he can spend freely. Make up your mind Don Banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishOrange15 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Well, I think he's overblowing the "Lavar has injury problems" part. He was relatively healthy for his entire career sans 2004 where there was questions whether or not Gibbs and Williams handled his knee right. I don't blame Snyder for wanting to get out of the contract as that's just too much money to be paying Lavar, or really any linebacker for that matter unless there really is a re-incarnation of LT out there. I'd imagine that Lavar will get a very incentine based contract since he has a questionable reputation and he can afford to be cheap in his first year with his new team given the amount of money that he'll be getting from the Skins. Rich......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishOrange15 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I'm just wondering where he got this from in the article: • I haven't seen this reported anywhere, but it turns out this whole CBA extension process has been slowed by the Redskins gamely holding out for a reduced salary cap. Not for the players. For the coaches. With Gibbs making such big bucks, and three of his assistants pulling down seven figures a year -- Gregg Williams, Al Saunders and Greg Blache -- Daniel Snyder has got to be saying, ''Stop me, before I over-spend again.'' that doesnt even make sense to me. anyone know what the heck he's talking about He's saying that the Skins are slowing up the CBA process because they are afraid of getting a salary cap placed on the coaching staff. They are by far the highest paid coaching staff in the league. Personally, I think Banks is nuts on this one. I can't imagine the possibility of putting a cap on coaching contracts would hold up any CBA talks. Rich............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 It would be kind of intriguing to see if Joe Gibbs could get that group to the playoffs, in the process cementing his legendary coaching status once and for all. Oh, and put me down for Week 3 in the when-will-Clinton Portis-pop-off pool. Something tells me Washington's star running back wouldn't be all that hip to wasting a season playing with a watered-down roster. wtf? since when was Portis a problem player? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsunami001 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I'm just wondering where he got this from in the article: • I haven't seen this reported anywhere, but it turns out this whole CBA extension process has been slowed by the Redskins gamely holding out for a reduced salary cap. Not for the players. For the coaches. With Gibbs making such big bucks, and three of his assistants pulling down seven figures a year -- Gregg Williams, Al Saunders and Greg Blache -- Daniel Snyder has got to be saying, ''Stop me, before I over-spend again.'' that doesnt even make sense to me. anyone know what the heck he's talking about ESPECIALLY when he says this right after: News flash: In truth, owners such as Snyder, Jerry Jones and Kraft aren't exactly scared of life in an uncapped NFL. They'd welcome it. The way they see it, they'd be fine with no restrictor plates on their wallets. Banks is a joke :laugh: How anyone can call him intelligent is beyond me. News flash: Snyder wanted those guys, took advantage of the lack of cap for coaches to lure them away from head coaching jobs....now you think he WANTS a cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Sigh... guys, he was JOKING about the salary cap for coaches. He didn't contradict himself. He was JOKING. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonBurgundy&Gold Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 ...or maybe Banks is still the same idiot he always was and he's wrong about this. For real. I'm not one of the Pro Lavar people as I'm pretty indifferent about the situation. Just find it funny that you guys say Banks is clueless and bias against the Skins until he says we did the right thing once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinstzar Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Wow someone from SI that actually wrote an intelligent piece? You find that intellegent? Here is why it is fundamentally wrong. One coach has had a problem with Lavar. That is Dale Lindsey. The other coaches were able to get a high level of production out of Lavar. Lavar himself said he has talked to Marvin Lewis and the comments about him were not true. The author of this article talks about Lavar's injuries the last 3 years. Last I saw he was only considered injured for the last 2. Prior to that 2 he was making pro bowls. Saying Lavar is not coachable is the PC thing to say. What about not knowing how to use Lavar. Lavar is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. A truly great coach will figure this out and find a way to maximize his potential. Again, the author of this article just listens to what everyone else says and then looks at the stats. He probably didn't watch more than three Redskins games last year. Lavar is going to make some team out there better if the coach pulls back the reigns and puts him in a position to succeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 ESPECIALLY when he says this right after:Banks is a joke :laugh: How anyone can call him intelligent is beyond me. News flash: Snyder wanted those guys, took advantage of the lack of cap for coaches to lure them away from head coaching jobs....now you think he WANTS a cap? Banks was making a joke. So really, the joke's on you. Some people need to lighten up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Well, I think he's overblowing the "Lavar has injury problems" part. He was relatively healthy for his entire career sans 2004 where there was questions whether or not Gibbs and Williams handled his knee right.I don't blame Snyder for wanting to get out of the contract as that's just too much money to be paying Lavar, or really any linebacker for that matter unless there really is a re-incarnation of LT out there. I'd imagine that Lavar will get a very incentine based contract since he has a questionable reputation and he can afford to be cheap in his first year with his new team given the amount of money that he'll be getting from the Skins. Rich......... That's what I've been saying for a while now. It was just an insane contract for a LB. They're too easy to replace to be paid that much money (as 04 proved). He's making Tom Brady money and I don't think anyone in their right mind could suggest that Lavar has nearly the impact that Tom Brady does on his team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirkNC Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 As far as Lavar injuries go... They are indeed adding up. Not so much the knee though that too is obviously a concern. If I were a team thinking about Lavar my biggest concern would be on the concussions. They add up and he has had more than a couple over the last 5 years. They are an issue. They will remain an issue and they will be a factor in his play down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cphil006 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 LaVar has been a drama queen. His asinine comments bashing the management and coaching staff on how they "dealed" with his injury! That is freakin' ridiculous. How the "dealed" with his injury? What does that mean! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailSkinz1 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I have a personal boycott against SI (something to do with Peter F'ing King), but I do think this guy makes a good point. LaVar didn't just have a hard time with Lindsey, but he had a hard time with Marvin Lewis as well. Remember his "crying" about having to be in a three point stance and all that? In order for LaVar to be successful, he needs to find the right defensive scheme - one that will exploit his freelancing ability (assuming he still has the ability after his injuries). One thing though that I always found interesting is how much LaVar liked Marty when everyone else hated him. Hail, H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I can't say that I disagree. Finally, a journalist who doesn't bash the Skins for their decision on LA.http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/07/labor/2.html • Somebody out there could always make the mistake of helping LaVar Arrington recoup that $4.4 million he forfeited to buy his way out of his Washington contract. But if you've been paying attention the past three years or so -- to the injuries, to the coaches who have grown frustrated with his act and to his penchant for self-aggrandizing -- I don't know why you would invest big money in a player whose reputation far exceeds his recent production. Well put and 100% accurate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 SI is a ****ing joke, period. Prime example? The scumbag writers putting out a book on the Bonds steroid issue, just as baseball is getting ready to go in full swing. As a baseball fan I'm tired of this BS and can we just get back to the game already? I'm glad I cancelled my subscription. Everyone else should follow suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 I like how there are writers that members of this board will bash to kingdom come, and rightly so, because of their idiotic views. That is until they write a piece we agree with. Then they are a very intelligent person worth listening too. How quickly we forget for the sake of an agreeing viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.